《天才法》将增强恐怖主义的融资

美国参议院和众议院都在考虑为稳定币创建监管框架的法案，所有常规的加密怀疑论者都已经演唱了，包括加密货币犯罪的赞美诗。

Both the U.S. Senate and House are considering bills creating a regulatory framework for stablecoins, and all of the usual crypto-sceptic refrains have been sung, including the hymn that crypto is for crime.

美国参议院和众议院都在考虑为稳定币建立一个监管框架的法案，所有常规的加密coptication的拒绝都已演唱，其中包括加密货币犯罪的赞美诗。

For instance, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) warned that the Senate’s GENIUS Act “will supercharge the financing of terrorism.” During debate on the House’s STABLE Act, Representative Brad Sherman (D-CA) worried about the use of “unhosted wallets to evade” anti-money laundering provisions.

例如，参议员伊丽莎白·沃伦（D-MA）警告说，参议院的天才法案“将增强恐怖主义的融资”。在有关众议院稳定法案的辩论中，代表布拉德·谢尔曼（Brad Sherman）（D-CA）担心使用“未遗产的钱包逃避”反洗钱的规定。

Not surprisingly, both the GENIUS and STABLE Acts include significant sections on illicit finance, subjecting stablecoin issuers to the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA). But lawmakers must ensure that the bills’ anti-money laundering measures don’t open the door to unfettered financial surveillance of stablecoin users.

毫不奇怪，天才和稳定的法案都包括有关非法财务的重要部分，使Stablecoin发行人遵守《银行保密法》（BSA）。但是，立法者必须确保法案的反洗钱措施不会为不受约束的稳定使用者的财务监视打开大门。

Stablecoins are crypto tokens that are pegged to the value of another asset, like the U.S. dollar. The general idea is that the stable value of these tokens will promote their use as a digital medium of exchange. Stablecoins can be thought of both as an improvement to existing payment rails and as a way to bring the U.S. dollar “on-chain.” In other words, stablecoins are a 21st-century upgrade to cash. The Senate and the House have both advanced bills that would create a regulatory regime for “permitted stablecoin issuers” aimed, in part, at ensuring that stablecoins are, in fact, stable.

Stablecoins是加密代币，与其他资产（如Dollar）的价值挂钩。一般的想法是，这些代币的稳定价值将促进它们用作数字交换媒介。可以将Stablecoins视为对现有付款轨道的改进，也可以将其带入“链上”。换句话说，Stablecoins是21世纪现金的升级。参议院和众议院都有高级法案，将为“允许的Stablecoin发行人”建立一个监管制度，部分目的是确保稳定的稳定性实际上是稳定的。

But these days, conversations about the dollar, financial services, and crypto seem to go hand-in-hand with conversations about preventing illicit finance. The BSA requires financial institutions to help federal agencies detect and prevent money laundering and other crimes by, among other things, keeping records of transactions and filing reports with the government. Both the GENIUS Act and the STABLE Act tackle illicit finance concerns by stating clearly that a permitted stablecoin issuer “shall be treated as a financial institution for the purposes of the Bank Secrecy Act.”

但是如今，关于美元，金融服务和加密货币的对话似乎与有关防止非法财务的对话并驾齐驱。 BSA要求金融机构通过保留交易记录并向政府提交报告，帮助联邦机构发现并防止洗钱和其他犯罪。 《天才法》和《稳定法》都清楚地指出，允许的稳定发行人“应将其作为银行保密法的目的视为金融机构”，以解决非法财务问题。

Designating a permitted stablecoin issuer as a financial institution is comparatively non-controversial. Putting aside the question of whether the BSA is a good (or constitutional) way to manage illicit finance risks, permitted stablecoin issuers look a lot like other entities, like banks and trust companies, that are already BSA financial institutions. But it’s not quite so simple.

将允许的Stablecoin发行人指定为金融机构是相对无争议的。撇开BSA是否是管理非法融资风险的好方法（或宪法），允许的Stablecoin发行人看起来很像其他已经是BSA金融机构的银行和信托公司，例如银行和信托公司。但这并不是那么简单。

The BSA’s surveillance framework requires financial institutions to “know their customers” and to monitor transactions taking place through the institution. However, such surveillance does not extend to transactions that take place between individuals without the involvement of an institution. For example, the BSA doesn’t apply when cash changes hands between two people, allowing individuals to transact privately.

BSA的监视框架要求金融机构“了解他们的客户”并监视通过该机构进行的交易。但是，这种监视并没有扩展到在个人之间进行的交易，而没有机构的参与。例如，当现金在两个人之间换手时，BSA不适用，允许个人私下进行交易。

While it’s infeasible to track cash transactions in the manner prescribed by the BSA, stablecoins can be tracked across a blockchain as they move between holders, even when the transfers happen between wallets that are unhosted by intermediaries. This characteristic is tempting to those who may want to extend BSA surveillance beyond its already expansive (and constitutionally infirm) boundaries.

尽管以BSA规定的方式跟踪现金交易是不可行的，但即使在持有人之间移动时，也可以在区块链中跟踪Stablecoins，即使在中间人未宣布的钱包之间进行转移。这种特征吸引了那些可能希望将BSA监视扩展到已经扩大（和宪法软弱的）边界之外的人。

Fundamentally, digital asset transactions that are genuinely peer-to-peer should not be subject to greater government surveillance than peer-to-peer transactions in cash. Applying anti-money laundering provisions to unhosted wallets — which more closely resemble physical wallets holding cash than bank accounts — would be a massive expansion of financial surveillance and an unwelcome intrusion into the abilities of Americans to order their financial lives outside the eyes of the government.

从根本上讲，真正是点对点的数字资产交易不应受到更大的政府监视，而不是现金的点对点交易。将反洗钱的规定应用于未遗产的钱包（与持有现金的物理钱包相比，这比银行账户都非常类似于物理钱包 - 将是对金融监视的大规模扩大，并且不受欢迎的不受欢迎的入侵美国人在政府眼外命令其财务生活的能力。

Both the GENIUS and STABLE Acts make clear — to varying degrees — that stablecoin issuers must have customer identification programs only for customers who either hold accounts “with the permitted payment stablecoin issuer” (GENIUS) or who are “initial holders” of a payment stablecoin (STABLE).

天才和稳定的行为都在不同程度上明确表明，稳定的发行人必须只为拥有“允许的付款stablecoin发行人”（GENIUS）的客户提供客户身份证明计划（GENIUS），或者是付款Stablecoin（Stable）的“初始持有人”（Stable）。

But the other BSA requirements the bills would impose on stablecoin issuers, including maintaining anti-money laundering compliance programs, retention of records of stablecoin transactions, monitoring and reporting suspicious activity, are not so clearly limited. This leaves the door open to the imposition of broader surveillance requirements on stablecoin transactions that take place away from the issuer, which would be a major encroachment on Americans’ rights to transact privately.

但是，法案将对Stablecoin发行人施加的其他BSA要求，包括维持反洗钱合规计划，保留Stablecoin交易记录，监视和报告可疑活动，并不是那么明显地受到限制。这使对与发行人进行的稳定性交易的更广泛的监视要求开放，这将是对美国人私下交易权利的主要侵犯。

Fortunately, the sponsors of both bills seem to read the surveillance obligations narrowly. Representative Bryan Steil (R-WI), one of the sponsors of the STABLE Act, explained during the bill’s markup that requiring BSA surveillance of “every single self-hosted wallet” would “be a dramatic invasion of personal liberty” and that “Americans should not be treated the same as financial institutions.” And Senator Bill Hagerty (R-TN), one of the sponsors of the GENIUS Act, said during that bill’s markup that “[r]equiring issuers to monitor transactions on various blockchains would be costly and . . . time-consuming.”

幸运的是，这两个法案的赞助商似乎都狭义地阅读了监视义务。稳定法案的赞助商之一的代表布莱恩·史蒂尔（R-WI）在法案的标记中解释说，需要对“每个自托管钱包”进行BSA监视，“对人身自由的侵害是一种戏剧性的入侵”，并且“美国人不应与金融机构相同。” 《天才法案》的赞助商之一，参议员比尔·哈格蒂（R-TN）在该法案的标记中说：“ [r]等同于发行人监视各种区块链的交易将是昂贵的，而且耗时。”

This sentiment about the scope of the BSA obligations imposed must be clearly reflected in the text of both bills to definitively close the door to more expansive

关于施加的BSA义务范围的这种观点必须在两项法案的文本中明确反映，以确切地关闭大门的更广阔的范围